scholarly journals Yukawa unification with light supersymmetric particles consistent with LHC constraints

2019 ◽  
Vol 942 ◽  
pp. 30-44
Author(s):  
Mureed Hussain ◽  
Rizwan Khalid
2018 ◽  
Vol 778 ◽  
pp. 213-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Athanasios Karozas ◽  
George K. Leontaris ◽  
Qaisar Shafi
Keyword(s):  

1984 ◽  
Vol 246 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Ellis ◽  
H. Kowalski

1995 ◽  
Vol 349 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 238-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Buskulic ◽  
D. Casper ◽  
I. De Bonis ◽  
D. Decamp ◽  
P. Ghez ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amitava Datta ◽  
Anirban Kundu ◽  
Abhijit Samanta

1989 ◽  
Vol 04 (10) ◽  
pp. 2531-2559 ◽  
Author(s):  
DARIUSZ K. GRECH

The significance of numerical analysis in both nonsupersymmetric and supersymmetric Grand Unified Theories is pointed out. The exact analytical and numerical analysis we present shows a need of larger corrections to the values of unifying parameters, i.e. sin 2 θw, Mx, τp than those often quoted in literature. When an unmodified nonsupersymmetric version of SU(5) is considered we show that numerical computation allows some of the models still to be experimentally admissible. The difference between analytical and numerical results for the supersymmetric SU(5) model is also stressed. In particular, corrections due to the mass threshold of additional generations or supersymmetric particles are calculated both analytically and numerically at the two-loop level. We found them far more important for the final values of sin 2 θw, Mx and τp than the effects of Higgs-Yukawa couplings between scalars and fermions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 245 ◽  
pp. 06021
Author(s):  
Adam Leinweber ◽  
Martin White

Recent searches for supersymmetric particles at the Large Hadron Collider have been unsuccessful in detecting any BSM physics. This is partially because the exact masses of supersymmetric particles are not known, and as such, searching for them is very difficult. The method broadly used in searching for new physics requires one to optimise on the signal being searched for, potentially suppressing sensitivity to new physics which may actually be present that does not resemble the chosen signal. The problem with this approach is that, in order to detect something with this method, one must already know what to look for. I will showcase one machine-learning technique that can be used to define a “signal-agnostic” search. This is a search that does not make any assumptions about the signal being searched for, allowing it to detect a signal in a more general way. This method is applied to simulated BSM physics data and the results are explored.


2021 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Frank ◽  
Levent Selbuz ◽  
Ismail Turan

AbstractWe study $$Z^{\prime }$$ Z ′ phenomenology at hadron colliders in an $$U(1)^{\prime }$$ U ( 1 ) ′ extended MSSM. We choose a $$U(1)^{\prime }$$ U ( 1 ) ′ model with a secluded sector, where the tension between the electroweak scale and developing a large enough mass for $$Z^{\prime }$$ Z ′ is resolved by incorporating three additional singlet superfields into the model. We perform a detailed analysis of the production, followed by decays, including into supersymmetric particles, of a $$Z^{\prime }$$ Z ′ boson with mass between 4 and 5.2 TeV, with particular emphasis on its possible discovery. We select three different scenarios consistent with the latest available experimental data and relic density constraints, and concentrate on final signals with $$2\ell +\not \! \! E_{T}$$ 2 ℓ + ⧸ E T , $$4\ell +\not \! \! E_{T}$$ 4 ℓ + ⧸ E T and $$6\ell +\not \! \! E_{T}$$ 6 ℓ + ⧸ E T . Including the SM background from processes with two, three or four vector bosons, we show the likelihood of observing a $$Z^\prime $$ Z ′ boson is not promising for the HL-LHC at 14 TeV. While at 27 and 100 TeV, the situation is more optimistic, and we devise specific benchmark scenarios which could be observed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document